9rx

32 ms·

421.
by 9rx 8mo ago
"That does sound like something nice to have. However, recreating Google Sheets is a substantial undertaking. First, we need to evaluate the business case for duplicating something that already exists to ensure that there is a net bene
422.
by 9rx 8mo ago
My day job has me working on code that is split between two different programming languages. I'd say LLMs are pretty good at TDD in one of those languages and a hot mess in the other. Which, funny enough, is a pretty good reflection of
423.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> RFC 7231 are your specs It is more like a meta spec. You still have to write a final spec that applies to your particular technical constraints, business needs, etc. RFC 7231 specifies the minimum amount necessary to interface with t
424.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Tests are your spec. You write them first because that is the stage when you are still figuring out what you need to write. Although TDD says that you should only write one test before implementing it, encouraging spec writing to be an it
425.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Is a computer dense in real life? Does that not go without saying? Are you under the impression that HN is some kind of intelligent animal?
426.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Not really. That might change due to what is going on in the world, which is now seeing provinces having to become serious about expanding into new markets, but in the past sharing timezones with the USA has been much more important for the
427.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Canadian provinces are structurally more like countries within the EU than states within Germany. The EU operates with more than one timezone.
428.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Right. So why did you deny it earlier?
429.
by 9rx 8mo ago
No, unless you mean the problem of over-engineering? In which case, yes, that is a realistic concern. In the real world, tests are quite often more than good enough. And since they are good enough they end up covering all the same cases a h
430.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Okay, that's what sets what was classically known as "object-oriented" apart. Understandably, language evolves. If OO means something different today, what do most programmers call what used to be known as OO? I honestly have
431.
by 9rx 8mo ago
All comments are paid for in some way, even if only in "warm fuzzies". If that is sad, why are you choosing to be sad? But outlandish comments usually require greater payment to justify someone putting in the effort. If you'r
432.
by 9rx 8mo ago
It was incredibly useful in the olden days. The NeXT/Apple ecosystem leaned on it heavily. We have new ways to approach problems nowadays, so it may be fair to say that object-oriented programming is a relic of the past. I mean, it is
433.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> There are no 'messages' involved, and nothing is 'sent'. The conceptual difference is significant as an object can respond to messages that it doesn't have a method for. You are, conceptually, just sending a
434.
by 9rx 8mo ago
What would it have to say about it? When "object-oriented" was first told, it was said that what defines it is message passing. Simula does not have message passing. It uses function calling. Simula does have objects, but having o
435.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Absolutely not. It only sends a message. The receiver doesn't have to have a corresponding method and can do with that message what it will. Objective-C is a 'true' object-oriented language, like Smalltalk.
436.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> [[those squareBrackets] lookInsane:YES]. Nah, they are perfectly sane. They look like little ASCII envelopes because that's exactly the metaphor. Square brackets send messages.
437.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Making isn't dead, but the movement is. There is no longer a large gap of people who are gaining interested in it but who haven't yet figured out how to get started. Now, everyone who wants to make it is already doing it.
438.
by 9rx 8mo ago
I didn't take that the author was trying to make a point, rather pondering about when a word becomes worthy of inclusion in the dictionary. "Boiling water" is a word that hasn't (yet) been deemed worthy. On the other han
439.
by 9rx 8mo ago
I know "objectively" is completely made up just as much as the rest of English, so perhaps you are not using it as I recognize the word, but as I recognize it there is nothing objective about English. It is all just made up and us
440.
by 9rx 8mo ago
The reason is the same reason for why the word "hot water" is found in the dictionary: Because it has picked up other meaning. The word "boiling water" is not currently found in the dictionary because the meaning has not
441.
by 9rx 8mo ago
"Monkey wrench" is a word already found in the dictionary, so it wouldn't be a useful example. It already met the bar. The article is questioning why some words don't meet the bar for inclusion in the dictionary. The wor
442.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> I can confirm that "boiling water" definitively is "water that's boiling" and that two words Which are the two words? ["water that's", "boiling"] ["water", "that's
443.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Other languages meaning Javascript? Rust doesn't even have proper sum types. Try expressing this Coq sum type in Rust: { x : A & B x } I'll wait. If it is just as easy to emit a language that is type safe, why Rust?
444.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> super type safe Maybe if you're willing to write insanity like this: struct Zero; struct Succ<N>(N); trait Add<Rhs> { type Output; } impl<M> Add<M> for Zero { type
445.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Because they could. Try running a business that doesn't have the revenues to support high wages and you'll quickly figure out why you will pay as much as possible every single time: It means you can buy your way out of hiring the
446.
by 9rx 8mo ago
C: enum result_type { OK, ERROR }; union result_value { int value; char *error_message; }; struct result { enum result_type tag; union result_value value; };
447.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> By that definition a void* pointer in C is a sum type. No. That doesn't make any sense. void* is essentially equivalent to any in Go, which isn't sum types either. You can construct sum types in C by combining structs, enum
448.
by 9rx 8mo ago
> Interface defines an open class of types But can also define a closed set of types, perfectly satisfying "sum types". > This enables different syntax, like the match expression to be used, in which you exhaustively lis
449.
by 9rx 8mo ago
On second thought, I agree with your definition. So Go does, in fact, have tagged unions.
450.
by 9rx 8mo ago
Using interface as it was designed to be used offers first-class sum types. Although not all interface use equates to sum types. But they're not tagged unions. I expect that is still where your confusion lies. Tagged unions and sum typ

More ›